International Journal of Arts and Humanities (IJAH) Ethiopia Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IJAH, VOL.7(3), S/N 26, JULY, 2018 International Journal of Arts and Humanities (IJAH) Ethiopia Vol. 7 (3), S/No 26, JULY, 2018: 41-54 ISSN: 2225-8590 (Print) ISSN 2227-5452 (Online) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ijah.v7i3.5 Mise-En-Scene and Authenticity in Kunle Afolayan’s October 1 Nkechi Asiegbu Bature-Uzor Department of Theatre & Film Studies Faculty of Humanities University of Port Harcourt Email: [email protected]; [email protected], Phone No: +2348033193142; +2349024394469 ……………………………………………………………………………………………. Abstract Illusive realism is the hallmark of film narratives and it is achieved in film production through appropriate composition of narrative elements in film shots and sequences. These elements constitute the mise-en-scene and their purpose is geared towards authenticating the narrative, while offering the basis for the interpretations and meanings given it. This study examines Kunle Afolayan’s October 1, focusing on the significant role played by mise-en-scene in carrying the thematic thrust through the use of realistic sets, props, costumes and make-up. It hinges on the analysis of these elements to understand their role in the signification of the period in the narrative. Using semiotic principles, it analyses these elements as signs denoting and connoting a certain period in Nigerian history. This study also emphasizes the semiotic readings of mise-en-scene in Nollywood films to tinge out relevant meanings encoded in the composition of images in film narratives. It is also expected to guide the Nigerian filmmaker towards accuracy in the use of mise-en-scene. It is hoped that film makers will create believable illusions of reality using the narrative elements that can best support the narration. Key Words: Mise-en-scene, Narrative, Props, Costume, Set, Make-up Introduction Mise-en-scene in film narratives involves the arrangement of objects and subjects in a film shot or frame in relation to the context and form. It is the visual representation and arrangement of objects in film narrative for signification. Originally, itis a French word which simply means “staging” but according to Phillips (2009), mise-en-scene in film studies refers to “everything put before the camera in preparation for filming” (p.11). A film’s mise-en-scene is a frame taken from a stylistic angle which represents the surrounding environment before the camera. It furnishes the images of subject(s) and objects of real life. Within the frame are images of physical and tangible materials that are included in Copyright © International Association of African Researchers and Reviewers, 2006-2018:www.afrrevjo.net 41 Indexed African Journals Online (AJOL): [email protected] IJAH, VOL.7(3), S/N 26, JULY, 2018 film narratives as signifiers, while the subjects are the actors who represent the characters in the narrative. Together, they constitute the form and content of the narrative; while representing the reality of the film’s fictional world. Gibson (1998) explained that it is: the visual organization or composition of what is in front of the camera (…). Traditionally a concern with mise-en-scene has focused upon a film’s use of setting, props, lighting, colour, positioning of figures, and, of course, costume. Mise-en-scene analysis has conventionally been associated with the study of the narrative film and how mise-en-scene may be seen to reinforce, complement, or, in some cases, subvert the meanings suggested by plot, dialogue, and character (p. 37). It then means that mise-en-scene is geared towards the reinforcement of illusion of reality in the narrative. This reinforcement is made possible through the use of appropriate props, locations, costumes, make-up and set pieces that convey the right imagery within the narrative discourse. Similarly, Braudy and Cohen (2009) while discussing the film image and how it bears meaning as narrative informed: … the basic unit of cinema, the shot, conveys meaning because of the iconic or isomorphic relation it bears to the world it photographs. (…). In the beginning film was purely iconic- it signified exclusively by means of the resemblance of its imagery to objects in the visible world. (pp. 3-4) The image here refers to objects found in the mise-en-scene which in turn constitute the visual signs used by the filmmaker. It includes most of the time, props, costumes, make-up as well as set objects. Based on the notion above, Sparshott (1979) extolled Siegfried Kracauer who believes that the best use of film is as the best means to convey authenticity, to preserve and celebrate the sense of reality. Kracauer’s argument is not that film is actually a record or chronicle of reality, but that it celebrates and “redeem(s),” as no other medium can, the radiant actuality of the physical world, (…). (pp. 325-326) What it implies is that film images bear meaning based on the meanings they carry in real life. This way, film can celebrate the sense of “authenticity” and “reality” due to what constitutes the mise-en- scene. These images help to authenticate the narrative thereby giving the viewer a feeling of reality and actuality. Props, location, set furniture, make-up and costume provide this authentication needed to represent the reality. Furthermore, Braudy and Cohen (2009, p.2) explained that mise-en-scene “emphasizes not the ordering, but the content of images. The film’s effect and meaning are not the product of a juxtaposition of images, but is inherent in the visual images themselves.” Yet, the ordering of the objects within the content can also carry another level of meaning in a narrative as stated earlier. On this note, Giannetti (1996) argues that mise-en-scene encompasses four distinct formal elements in film narrative: (1) the staging of action, (2) the physical setting and decor, (3) the manner in which these materials are framed, and (4) the manner in which they are photographed p.41). Each of these formal elements is closely linked in the process of film signification. The numbers (2), (3), and (4) above aid the realization of (1). Similarly, Phillips (2009) described mise-en-scene as consisting of three major aspects of filmmaking: the setting; the subject(s) being filmed, usually actors or people as themselves; and the composition, the arrangement of the settings, lighting and subjects (p.11) Furthermore, Kolker and Giannetti argued that mise-en-scene involves the complex articulation of space through composition, light, and movement, and that it can be used to analyse the way personality, style, and meaning are connected in a frame (1996, pp.16-17; 2006, pp.36-37). This is in line with Philips’ (2009) earlier position on the third category of what constitutes mise en scene. Bordwell and Thompson (2001) explaining the importance of mise-en-scene noted thus: Copyright © International Association of African Researchers and Reviewers, 2006-2018:www.afrrevjo.net 42 Indexed African Journals Online (AJOL): [email protected] IJAH, VOL.7(3), S/N 26, JULY, 2018 After seeing a film, we may not recall the cutting or the camera movements, the dissolves of the off screen sound. But we do remember the costumes in Gone with the Wind or the bleak, chilly lighting in Charles Foster Kane’s Xanadu. We retain vivid impressions of the rainy, gloomy streets in The Big Sheep or thee labyrinthine, fluorescent-lit liar of Buffalo Bill in The Silence of the Lambs. …….. In short, many of our most sharply etched memories of the cinema turn out to center on mise-en-scene. (p.156) This is to say that the understanding of mise-en-scene is very crucial in both the production and also analysis of film narratives for realistic representation and appreciation. Discussing the notion of realism of film images, Heath (1981) explained that “a film is precisely an image, the image of an image (reality), the reproduction of existing representations: in short, a reflection” (p.4) These reflections from the “image of an image” function within the narrative as part of the communicating symbols that trigger a film’s semiosis. Mise-en-scene may include set/furniture, locations, costumes, make-up lighting and other properties (props) seen in film frames as well as the actors representing the characters. It is important therefore that the filmmaker pays closer attention to mise-en-scene for an authentic and realistic expression and effect. Citing Marcel Carne, Giannetti (1996) noted that “one must compose images as the old masters did their canvases, with the same preoccupation with effect and expression” (p.39). This buttresses the fact that the arrangement of the mise-en-scene is crucial in the meaning- making process of a film. Whether in epic or contemporary narratives, mise-en-scene is very central in the meaning making process. It creates, almost entirely, the feeling of reality that is conveyed to the viewer by providing even the minutest detail in narratives. For Perkins (1979), Mise-en-scene provides what he refers to as “fictional “reality” that “is created in order to be recorded” (p. 47) The realities are created for their purpose and relevance within the narrative’s reality. Considering the place of mise-en-scene in the representation of film’s physical reality, it is obvious that categorization of films is also dependent upon the choice of what the filmmaker presents in its mise-en- scene. Film genres are easily recognizable through set, props, costume, make-up and the behaviours of the subjects (actor’s movement and gestures). Together, these elements help the filmmaker to achieve the visual aesthetics and the reality of the fictional world. For the purpose of this discourse, attention is focused on the role of props, costume, set and make-up in realising Kunle Afolayan’s October 1, a historical yet, a fictional epic narrative.